Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
STATION
MSNBCW 12
CSPAN 11
CNNW 10
CSPAN2 7
CNN 3
KQED (PBS) 3
CNBC 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
MSNBC 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WJZ (CBS) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 80
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)
in egypt, in syria we don't have a process yet. >> rose: why not? >> because you know, the government is entrenched in a kind of denial position. saying that this is not the arab spring. this is-- . >> rose: terrorist. >> terrorist and conspiracy. >> rose: right. >> from outside. and of course the opposition think of themselves as a revolution. so they are not talking about the same problem. >> rose: and they've got the problem that syrians are killing syrians which always divides a huge mountain to provide. >> a lot of people are angry with me because i have called it civil war. but i'm afraid that is what it is. people were angry with me in baghdad when i said the same thing. so yes, it is, it is, it has a lot of what the revolution has but it has also an aspect of civil war. i think that is what is to be said to the security council sill that you have like in any conflict you have circles. the innercircle which is the locals, the region and the international. >> rose: right. >> security council is, has had a lot of difficulty coming together. yet it is probably the easiest ring to
not government. companies work hard at fighting bacteria simply to protect their brand. competition, that fight for reputation protects us much better than government ever will. that's our show. i am john stossel. thanks for watching. captioned by, closed captioning services, inc. in four seconds . >> tont on huckabee. republicans say the president will not budge. raising tax instead of a balanced approach instead of cutting spending is wrong. >> is the president serious about avoiding the fiscal cliff allen webb resphond. >> my homeowner insurance offered me $150 what can i do with that? >> they lost the home and business and sense of security. victims of super storm sandep ho on how they are coping. >> who can throw their hate in the ring for 2016. ladies and gentlemen. our guest host tonight dana preno. [ applause ] ♪ >> welcome to huckabee. i am dana pereno and i want to thank governor huckabee to have me guest host. it is it a month since the presidential election and half of the country is elate vindicate they voted for president obama and walking on cloud 9. the other half
government. of course, the legal profession is crucial to the rule of law anywhere. weifang is correct to use the platform he has to force thousands of chinese students and to try to inspire them. it is important that we remain mindful of the admonition that even though lawyers value liberty, which is about taking away liberty, they are content. lawyers and the legal profession are tied to the status quo. this captures the dilemma of the elite bar today in china. its capacity to advance liberalization is constrained by officials and the party. i cannot tell you how many dozens of chinese lawyers have, with great regret, told me this themselves. honesty compels me to say if i were in their position, i am not sure i would act differently. there is a reason we are honoring he weifang today. he has an unusual degree of courage. weifang is not alone. it is striking to me how much of the impetus for rule of law in china has come not so much from elite professionals, but from a chinese of far more humble and modest stations. if you look at rights of protective lawyers and rave at this -- activists a
and weighing down americans of every race, creed and religion is an insat i can't believe government spending machine. they are not tackling so much what we heard in the campaign. i believe that political venge is a terrible way to leave the country and good policy and setting goals and taking bold action. anyone elected to office has a responsibility to weigh the evidence and we must hold them to the standard worthy of their office. in 2004, it was the democrats that wrung their hands. george bush had won reelection with a higher popular vote . increased republican majority in the house and senate. first time a president did that since fdr. yet the democrats won the house in 2006, presidency and house and senate in 2008. there are wild swings from one election to the next and will be again. so don't go wobbly instead go boldly forward to explain why you are right. because i believe you are. [ applause ] all right. instead of working with congress face to face to save the economy. president obama is trying to gets had way by doing what he does best. campaigning and making speeches about the f
? >> reporter: let's show you some of the savings when it comes to government spending. first of all, they put about $600 billion in what the republicans are calling health savings. we understand -- we don't have details. we understand much of that comes from medicare, things that we've heard from republicans over and over like raising the eligibility age, means testing, things like that. so then we have about $600 billion in essentially spending cuts, half from mandatory spending, half from discretionary spending. this is the other very interesting thing that's new. $200 billion from revising the consumer price index. that sounds very technical. but it has very real world consequences because it very much could affect the money, the checks that social security recipients in particular get every single month because it effectively changes inflation so it changes the formula from what they would get. >> significant differences between the white house proposal on this part of the equation as well as on the tax equation. the politics behind this latest republican counterproposal, are they just go
's grave for the obvious fact that we believe that the assad government has weapononized chemical and biological agents and put them in a position where they can be used fairly rapidly. as you look back over the 20 months of this conflict, this follows a series of events, one leading to the other which people said could not happen. this began, remember, with peaceful demonstrations. and when assad was unable to control them or suppress, he began to fire on his own people and they began to defend themselves in a very unfair fight which everyone thought we should take sides on the side of freedom and give the freedom fighters the weapons with which they could fight. it happened much too late. and people said, at least he's not using his air force to attack his own people and then he began to attack his own people from the air. now more than 40,000 killed. so when we see the government of assad weaponize chemical and biological agents and put them in bombs, we know this is a leader with no limits and unfortunately he follows his father who proved capable of using weapons against his
. syrians have the right to choose their government, the president, and any individual to run the world. as these ideologies are conflicting right now, that is normal. we see that in egypt. each side tries to extend its power through institutions, through the constitution. i think this is a healthy discussion, especially after 40 years of dictatorship. the people are not used to sharing their opinions and hearing other opinions. they need some time to be able to reconcile all of the different ideologies. at the end, i believe in the syrian people that they will be able to end the assad regime. >> thank you. i would like to debate on the ideologies and the syrian opposition. i will let you go into this issue. can you talking about the role played by the syrian muslim brotherhood within the opposition. the majority of the seats still being that of the muslim brotherhood. the leaders are close -- what is the role played by them? >> i think the united states has to deal with the reality with the rise of muslim brotherhood and the whole region, not only in to nietzsche, egypt. the difference
and operation. you're dealing with deployment of governance, development of projects that extend governance. and then the security framework, we come the afghan people, and oh, by the way, inside with all this there's a lot of people are very contentious. what i call capital t. taliban, little key taliban and different insurgent groups and transnational terrorist groups. just this morning. so this battalion task force, we were given this mission about 2009 and we're going to deploy an approximate 2010. so as i came on board, the battalion and brigade had been to iraq three consecutive tours. and so the shift was intuitive. there were some germane lessons to be learned and transferred to afghanistan, but not everything. in iraq, and having served in iraq it's different when you have an almost second world infrastructure. they had a technical class of people. every september, books would be shipped out of baghdad. there was a system in place for a lot of bureaucratic and government means. they had a history of forming as a government. which we didn't have that in afghanistan. you didn't have
in the government's effort to go after the rebels. i mean, we have seen babies and children, women, civilians tortured and killed day after day in syria. and now the thought that they might unleash chemical weapons on them is focusing new attention on what happened back in 1988 when saddam hussein did it. he used the same type of chemical weapons to kill kurds, thousands of them. again, back in '88. thousands of innocent died in the attack, more than 10,000 suffered horrific injuries, not to mention -- we'll talk about it, exactly what happened in '88, how it unfolded, how they handled it and what the death toll was. they said birds just started dropping out of the sky, sheep and goats -- that was the first sign -- started keeling over in the fields dead, and then came the human death toll. it happens quickly, and it is awful. and it is one of the reasons why our government is taking this so seriously, this possible threat. and preparation now of weapons like sarin gas. more on that coming up in just a bit. >>> also from washington right now, fox news has confirmed that the fbi is today inves
back to state and local governments. but during an era of fiscal restraint and global warming, it's high time that we start this conversation in earnest. how big do you want your fema to be? how generous your disaster relief payments and how much do you want to pay for it? in today's "new york times" op-ed section, there's an article that points out potential liability for flood insurance alone is $1.25 trillion. second only to the liability for social security. right now we have arguably the worst of both worlds. the federal government responds to disaster usually paying too much for the wrong people to do the wrong things. we provide federal money to put people back in harm's way and sometimes provide infrastructure to make future risky development worse. we often take remedial action, like for theifying beaches, a temporary solution, that can actually accelerate erosion elsewhere, shift storm damage down the coast to another spot or more serious flooding downriver. by giving the illusion of protection, more people locate in dangerous areas and the vicious cycle is repeated with
a divided government. it is up to us to make this divided government work. we have to set aside partisan concerns. how to work together to prepare this economy to get people back on their feet? how do we get this sense of real security and upper mobility for all americans, especially those in need? they are the same. the old ways will not do. we need new thinking and renewed efforts from all americans. it is true that president obama won reelection. i congratulate him on his victory. on january 20, he will face a a fiscal economy and and i mess. you might say he will inherit these problems. [laughter] [applause] he his second term, i hope t will offer fresh ideas. failure will mean for more years of -- four more years we have work to do. -- four more years. we have work to do. serious solutions for serious reforms, we thank him for doing that. [applause] the election did not go our way. the republican party cannot make excuses. we cannot have the next four years on the sidelines. we need to apply our timeless principles to the challenges of the day. our party excels at representing that
the best politics is good governing and i think we need to see more focus on solving problems and getting things done in washington than playing politics. i think to recognize there's been real progress made, right the border is safer today, the immigration system is better, the two parties worked together to do that over the last few years. there are still some meaningful things that need to get done. the d.r.e.a.m. act, we have to fix the low-end and high-end visa system. the mexicans are going to do a whole boar border system. i think there will be a lot of room to work together next year to get something meaningful done. if the republicans are earnest and play it straight i think they'll get a lot of credit for working with the democrats to fix the broken immigration system and making it better. jon: getting something meaningful done, it seems like a longtime since that's happened in washington. we'll look forward to it. simon rosenberg. kate obenshane thank you much. jenna: the nato alliance warning the assad regime in syria against using chemical weapons against his own people. this
to expand the government. i wish the majority of the middle class saw it that way. more than half the country felt that his left wing agenda was it. it isn't eventually the middle class is going to get nailed. and the spin will be that republicans jacked up the economy so badly. >> i think that is where this is going. i think there could be a tax and maybe it can't get through congress. but i have never seen a time, i have seen polls on this. taxing the rich. they know that. one last point here. going from government to welfare getting a job. do you know there is a high tax rate? we have to figure out a way to make it work so that people don't get hurt. >> i think the government is probably 80% too large. that would be a tremendous engine to close the gap between the rich and the poor. they can will to their children. we don't have that now. i think that is the engine of both in the conneconomy. but i'm not going to give up the fight. larry elder. well done. good luck on the book and the radio show. >> let's get to good news. i'm going to take a closer look at sunshine next up. st
, creed and religion is an insatiable government spending machine whose leaders aren't tack-- and the leaders aren't tackling the hard truth that we heard so much about in the campaign. i believe that political revenge is a terrible way to lead the country. good policy is made by dealing in fact, setting goals, and taking gold action. anyone elected to office has a way to weigh the evidence and explain the votes and hold them to the standard worthy of their offices. remember n2004, the democrats were wringing their hands and george w. bush won with a higher popular vote total than in 2000 and he had increased the republican majorities in the house, and the senate. the first time a president had done that since fdr. and yet, the democrats came back to win the house in 2006. the presidency, the house and the senate in 2008. and there have been wild swings from one election to the next and there will be again, but don't go wobbly now, instead, go boldly forward to explain why you are right because i believe you are (applause) >> thanks, all right. instead of working with congr
the pressing question of how to respond to the potential use of chemical weapons by the assad government in syria, the government warned him of the consequence conditions consequences he could expect. >> i want to make it clear to assad and those under his command the world is watching, the use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. and if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons there will be consequences and you will be held accountable. >> rose: i am pleased to have bob gates back at this table. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: so what are you doing since you left government? >> well, i am working on a book, a mental with a of my time under presidents bush and obama as secretary of defense, and doing some speaking but staying as far from washington, d.c. as i can. >> rose: when you look at writing a book, i mean, how hard is that for you to take the time anand think of all of the events and make sure that you get it right as you recollect it? >> first i have given myself a little out at the beginning by saying this is a purely personal reminiscence
showing shelling in aleppo uploaded earlier today. in the past, the syrian government cut off access in an operation. but this is unprecedented. the military jet and two helicopters were shot down by rebels. now, takeovers at military bases given them a new arsenal of heavy weaponry. in this attack, they used rockets and as cnn's arwa damon reports, the rebels claiming this as a major victory. >> reporter: children on the back of a tractor made off with a sizable tangled lump of metal. what was all too often the cause of nightmares now a trophy of war. proudly shown off by this man. we want to take these pieces to show them to the other villages, he says. let them see what happened to these planes. everyone we speak to here describes the fear they felt any time they heard a jet overhead. for them, this is the greatest victory. one man who we spoke to said he was picking olives, saw the plane being hit and the two pilots ejecting. he says at that point everyone fanned out looking for them. he and others are telling us that one pilot was found unconscious with a head injury. video post
governance, we would blanch. for instance, if egypt says you can only be elected president of egypt with 60% of the vote or if we said here in the united states, you can only be elected president with 60% of the vote, imagine the absolute chaos that would throw american democratic processes into. as the man who wrote the book literally, defending the filibuster, make the case why we should have this institution at all. >> first off, will et me observe that we do elect presidents with less than 50% majority, even presidents who didn't get the most votes. the filibuster isn't the only odd role we have. >> i agree. i'm going after them one by one. >> the long history of the senate more than 200 years filibuster has been around for a good deal of that. the role that the senate has played historically in our system is it's the last place where minority rights are protected. and the twin pillars, the foundation of what makes the senate a unique body is unlimited debate and unfeterred amendment. in the house of representatives, debate is limited, often debates are not permitted at all. in the sena
of government, and the president is proposing to grow it more. to spend more. the problem is isn't tax policy, mr. speaker. the problem is spending. you know, mr. speaker, we hear a lot about fairness. i want to talk a little bit about that now. i'm going to switch to tax policy because that's what everybody seems to be obsessed with in the media. i want to make sure we dispel some of the myths of what's going on there. i went to dictionary.com as i'm apt to do, mr. speaker, and printed out what fair is. they said free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice. the first definition. free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice. and two, legitimately thought, pursued, done, or given proper under the rules. fair. but i think we all support fairness. i'm certain that we do, but i'm absolute certain what president obama believes is fair is different from what the people i represent believe is fair. and what i brought here, mr. speaker, is a chart from the joint committee on taxation, that's the group here on capitol hill that is in charge of measuring all the tax policy, it's a nonpartisan group, they just
-evaluation. conservatism is an asset, not a liability, as we try to govern this country in the 21st century. and i look forward to staying in touch with jim and to working with him at the heritage foundation to see what we can do to improve the fate of our country so we will not become greece. no one is more worried about this nation's unsustainable debt situation than senator demint. i've seen him deinvolve over time to someone who could just not sit quietly, who had to take up the cause. in the 2010 election cycle, he was one of the strongest voices this he had would a lost our way -- that we'd lost our way in washington. jim is a kind, sincere man, an individual who is a joy to be around. when it comes to what's going on in america, jim understands that if we don't make some changes we're going to lose our way of life. that's what's driven him above all else, to try to keep our country a place to be place where you can be anything. i look forward to working with jim in the private sector. from a personal point of view, we've had a great ride together. it has been fun. it has been challenging, and i
and more able to bring the fight to the government forces. i don't know that you can say that for the entire country it is yet at a tipping point but it certainly seems that the regime will be much harder pressed in the next months. >> eliot: in cairo protesters continue to press the regime of president mohammed morsi to relinquish the new powers he announced for himself this week. some protesters also object to the new draft egyptian constitution, which was finished friday and sent to morsi for review. meanwhile in israel you prime prime minister benjamin netanyahu government has announced plans to build housing that would physically link jerusalem with major west bank settlement. it is called counterproductive to the goals resuming direct negotiations between israel and the palestinians and achieving the two-state peace settlement that has been the u.s. diplomat i can goal for decades. for more on all these issues let's go to nicholas burns former undersecretary of state for political affairs former ambassador to n.a.t.o. and greece and now professor at the harvard kenn
yesterday on c- span2. if any family brand their house all the way the u.s. government ran there's, if we could not print money, we would be in a very bad way. i just think we need to get this deficit under control. those two wars that we have not paid for need to be paid for. you know, it has to be done. if going off the fiscal cliff means that it will be done, so be it. host: other groups are weighing in on these fiscal cliff talks. here is "the new york times" -- in the "financial times" this morning -- roger altman writing today in "the financial times." president obama will be meeting with several governors today at the white house to talk about the fiscal cliff. they will be meeting this morning around 10:00 a.m. eastern time, and then the governors are slated to hold a news conference at around 11:30 a.m. eastern time. go to our website for more details. washington insiders tackle fiscal cliff policy solutions. the group will hold a roundtable discussion today on the importance of reform to address the nation's debt and deficit spending this event takes place this morning around 8:
of the president's promised balanced approach. you know, where is he going to start restrained growth in government? we're open to working with anybody who's willing to acknowledge the problem. >> greta: who's going to blink first? >> first of all, let me tell you where you should get revenue. >> greta: okay. >> by growing the economy. just a couple numbers. already in this meager economic recovery, we've increased revenue to the federal government by $344 billion. if we just return to a normal economy, like we had in 2007, under president bush, where proven was 18.5% of our economy, that would raise another $400 billion per year. the president's proposal right now, the highest estimated is $75 billion, a tenth of that. economic growth is 10 finals more effective at raising revenue. the problem with punishing success, the problem with the president's proposal, it will put that economic growth at risk. you know, i think the best question really is, what is the president's plan? show us your plan. this is about returning confidence to the economy. >> greta: a plan to rev up the economy or a plan for
is going to be done down the road by the government. i don't know anyone who would ever believe such a promise. i don't expect that the republicans would accept that offer from the president. i just don't see that as ever happening in the city. let me ask you -- >> i'm sorry. republicans basically have to say our principles here are correct. our whole analysis of the economy is correct. we need massive spending decreases, and they've got to stick with that. if they can get decent spending increases and have to agree to additional revenue, fine. if they get pushed in the position the president is trying to push them, they stick with their principles, you know, and a year and a half from now go to the electorate with that. it worked in 10. it will probably work in 14. it will be a shame because it will do a lot of damage to our economy in between, but the president has that really on his shoulders. he's the leader. >> greta: mayor, thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> greta: breaking news out of syria. the syrian government mixing components for the deadly sarin nerve gas. the ranking
the federal government work better. the president requested reorganization authority from the congress to do just that. >> chief strategist from the romney campaign described the way president obama won reelection . there was a time not so long ago when the problems of the democrat party was too liberal and too dependent on minorits. obama turned those problems to advantages and rode that strategy to victory. it comes six weeks after a face to face showdown on the deadly raid in the u.s. consulate in benghazi. >> you said it an act of terror. it was not a spontanous demitration. >> please proceed, governor. >> i want to make sure we get that for the record. >> and while he is in town, he will meet with congressman paul ryan. they have kept in touch and at a are catching up somewhere off cap capt hill where ryan has returned to work. >> steve: i wonder if candy crowley will be invited. >> gretchen: it is a photop. it is disappointing in the sense. if it were president bill clinton, you might think that something. ideas might be exchanged with one another. >> steve: some folks suggest that may
businesses which provide 67% of the jobs in this country. that may fund the government for a short time. then, what's the plan? stimulus 2.0. because the first stimulus worked so well? that was a disaster as well. we have a $16 trillion deficit, and the president wants to spend more money. are you kidding me? spending is the problem. we don't need more of it. lastly, he wants the power to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval. the administration cannot issue an edict like a money monarchy. congress, congress, congress is in control of the purse. we have gone wild and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. quigley: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the impact that independent locally owned businesses have in our communities comes as no surprise. the social and environmental outcomes are essentia
. it was talking about the power of the government not to take away guns from a well-regulated militia. everyone should exercise personal responsibility, by refusing to have a gun in their home. not putting their children at risk of suicide or murder. yes, people should be punished but we shouldn't encourage criminal conduct by having guns at flea markets to criminals and felons and anybody that wants to own a gun. if this football player hadn't had a gun there would be two people alive today not dead. >> that is not true. if he wanted to kill somebody, there are plenty of weapons including his fist, a car, a bomb that can do it. if you take away the gun, that intention is still there. >> but it's a fleeting intention. it lasts a minute. and if you have a gun, it takes only a second. >> it's a fleeting -- you are putting the word -- >> to carole's point. it is people that kill people. i think it is important to make sure. >> it is people with guns who kill people. >> no. let's talk about in england. >> we're moving on. there's a lot to cover here. this debate will rage again because there will b
the immediate impact from the government coming back and spending wouldn't be that great. the question then is how do businesses and consumers react? i don't think it will be a pretty sight. >> what about the debt ceiling? there was a suggestion? geithner's opening bid that they do a permanent fix and give the president the operative control over whether or not the debt ceiling is raised. there's a lot of confusion out there about what the debt ceiling really is. opponents to this tend to argue this will increase government spending when you and i know it's just to raise the limit for what congress has already appropriated to be spent. >> in a perfect world a debt ceiling is a stupid way to run a railroad. congress should appropriate what it wants to appropriate. the white house and the executive branches should go ahead and spend it and that's the way you should run it. we're not in a perfect world and we have the debt ceiling. i don't see any possibility that the republicans are going to permanently give up the right to weigh in on the debt ceiling from time to time. on the other han
and bigger government regardless of the impact on jobs and economy and america's standing in the world. >> gretchen: who could the fiscal cliff jumpers be. matt is editor in chief of the washington weekend. he's my guest. good morning. >> good morning. >> gretchen: who wants to go off of the cliff and die. >> buckle your seat. important senator is patti murray in charge of the democrat campaign committee. she got put in the position thinking it was not a good year for democrats and she turned into one. that gave her clout in the democratic caucus. when she gave a speech saying we could make a more liberal deal if we go off the cliff democrats started listening. >> gretchen: senator harry reid want to go off the cliff. >> he's playing the double game. he want to look like a deal make yer support the president. but so many democrats have a strange idea of compromise. it is all right. give me everything and i will do nothing. what we are seeing from the democrats, republicans you cave on taxs and revenue and we'll not cut entitlements at all. that is not a good deal and suggests that more
is the minister, the father is the father, the sun is the son and jeff government. so if everyone in his, and i should say or her place though confucianism doesn't leave much fun for the element. and that within the region and with the world as china looks at, a sense of harmony, japan would be law, that sense of harmony and how you would achieve it is that their frustration is that the work is not just acquiescing to the notion that they are a rich country, that they are returning, that they're powerful, that they want respect. and they want to see the world kind of step back and give it greater latitude, but doesn't see this. this is what i think whether i personally think we are on a collision course. because when you look at what china's expectations of the world are, you also look at its paranoia, you look at jim, i'd love to hear utah, you're such an expert insider, what's going on in the cyber world. you see something which seems hard to me, despite her best efforts in not one to replace history, that the rise of a great power usually and often leads to messiness. usually and often leads
for the disabled worldwide is to be active in this. [inaudible] many of these in the government do little bras little for their people. they often corrupt government i think the state department should strengthen its outreach in this important area and even drafted a statute law that required them to establish a department within their agency. they have is on their goals, but i don't think it domino leadership, and i think that is the way the government normally runs on here. you have a secretary of state, the president of the united states, and the secretary said certain priorities. you have to raise the level of priorities with the disabled. i truly believe that. i have a real clear vision. a vision of people when you have computer and a blind person with a disability or the a person with weakened vision can read it or the computer can talk to them. they talk to the computer and it talks back. it's not that expensive. that is one thing that we ought to be doing is advancing and ensuring that the equipment and devices and treatment better life transforming are given more emphasis by governmen
. and so, listen, i understand ideologically why people who believe that they want to shrink government up so small they can drown it in a bathtub may always lead that way, but it's not in the best interest of the american people in my humble opinion. >> i am going to be measured in my response because you all have an obligation to ask questions. but i hope at some point you all who have heard us on this side and the other side of the aisle talking about this will do the math, quite honestly. i can tabulate very quickly for you $3 trillion worth of cuts that have now gone into law that democrats have been there on the tough -- on those tough negotiations. the chairman mentioned $1 trillion that was exacted as a result of the budget control act where the republicans were threatening for the first time have the nation default on its credit if we didn't do something. $1 trillion. that's already taking place, the $1 trillion in cuts. there's another $1.2 trillion that came from the same law, as we know, as the sequester, that also by law will start to take place. that's $2.2 trillion. we talke
the tax code, not increasing tax rates. we can address wasteful government spending that jeopardize an hour commitments in the national defense and protecting our most honorable. we can jump-start our economy by assuring americans that congress and the president can work together to get the job done and deal courageously with the pressing problems of today. when it comes to the fiscal cliff, the president and congress will either fail together or we will succeed together. there is nothing in between. i am confident that we can pass the test and do what is good and right for the american people. >> the president has been talking a lot about taxes lately, and as acpa who practiced for years and a member of ways and means committee, there is no one who likes to talk about tax more than i do. but let's be honest -- talking about taxes is not going to solve the problem that america faces. we have to turn to the spending side of the ledger. furthermore, his tax proposal will kill about 700,000 jobs and do harm to the economy, again, the wrong direction. i think house republicans have set
those governments are we believe that is their long-term goal. iran has been involved in terrorism as we know for some time. it's partly unique in that area. we have seen the i-beam regime operating through organizations such as republican guard and employ such tactics around the globe including right here in washington, d.c. however, the proximity of the south caucasus to iran as well as strong relationship with armenia, azerbaijan and georgia. have with both of the united states and israel, it increases the appeal of the iranians for targeting those countries. i applaud those governments in the region for the vigilance against the iranian threat. however, i'm particularly concerned about the security at the u.s. embassy as the agent location of the facility leave our people there particularly vulnerable. i often find myself comparing the geopolitics of the south caucasus to accordion not. a tangle of current events of these countries in the region isolated from their neighbors. unfortunately, such isolation can blame to the hands of hours laying on the periphery of the region. press re
to the government at all. here's the bottom line in all of this. house republicans have voted for paul ryan's budget twice. which turns medicare into a voucher program. that's really what they want to do. if they had the power, that's where they would go. the idea is deeply unpopular with the american people in polls. and that has been shown time and time again e. republicans want these kinds of cuts, but they would rather pin it on president obama than to take the blame. i say bring it on. it does pencil out. let's turn to dr. zeke emanuel, chair of medical ethics and health policy at university of pennsylvania and one of the architects of the affordable care act, which is now obama care. thank you for being with us tonight. sort this out for us. the $400 billion on the table with obama care or with medicare that the republicans deny cuts. who is telling the truth here? >> well, the real issue is whether you're cutting things to beneficiaries or using those cuts to really transform the system to make it more modern. and i think as they did in the campaign, they are trying to say this will harm bene
that even in a divided government conagra's and congressional leaders of both parties could come together with an agreement to avoid the pending 40% sequester and enact legislation would reduce the growth and spending and raise taxes that in today's dollars would be the equivalent of $1.8 trillion over a ten year period. also on the positive side, some will disagree the 1990 budget summit did put in place an enforcement procedure that takes deficit targets for the caps on discretionary spending as i've indicated and the correct government concept development the chairman puts forth and i was also disappointed in the 1990 budget agreement that may have been a factor as i indicated. i believe those procedural changes did help limit the deficit spending and help lead to the 1993 and could lead to the balanced budget act of the century. but in the end it is also true that after negotiations and sequestering 26 at aaron preus air force base in weekend retreat became a and the 11 day siege in the final negotiations put to rest towards the big eight that you are going to hear from. today along w
, the treasury department has options. there is a constitutional option. no one believes that the u.s. government is going to default on its debt and stop paying interest on its bond. even if it did things are so bad throughout thest the rest of the world it would not cause people to dump our treasury securities. i don't think there is that much continuing that could be done even if we go down that road again. >> eliot: they have no place else to put their money. are they going to buy greek debt and declare a default? john boehner used that card. it failed, he got egg on his face and we were downgraded. all the negative things that people said would happen didn't happen and in fact just the opposite. but my advise advice would be to put your seat belt and this this is one of these budgie jump moments you just ride it: brian let me come back to you. the difference where the white house is and john boehner is not that great in the context of a ten-year time frame. what are we fighting over? >> we're fighting over where to take that money from and when to do it. everything specific comes up out of
the government, but soon they could face a weapon even deadlier than any they've seen so far. cnn's pentagon correspondent barbara starr is joining us with the latest new threat on the possible use of chemical weapons. >> reporter: wolf, the challenge is for the obama administration to figure out exactly what bashar al assad is up to with his deadly arsenal. the horror remains unspeakable. 25 years ago saddam hussein unleashed one of the worst poison gas attacks in history. thousands were killed. now, in syria, u.s. concerns are growing by the hour that bashar al assad may be planning the same thing against his citizens. >> the intelligence that we have raises serious concerns that this is being considered. >> reporter: u.s. intelligence shows syria has mixed chemical compounds needed to make a deadly agent that can quickly kill thousands. >> the united states and our allies are facing the prospect of an imminent use of weapons of mass destruction in syria. and this may be the last warning we get. >> reporter: the u.s. is not precisely saying what the syrians are doing, but there are two way
, security, public safety, those are the fundamental obligations of government. and secondly, we live in an increasingly dangerous world with increasing threats against our citizens and targets that are viewed as high profile. for those reasons, mr. speaker and others, i earnestly believe those who serve this country as president should never have to worry about their personal safety. under current law, protection for president obama and president george w. bush will cease after 10 years. both men are young, enjoy good health and have long lives ahead of them postpresidency. this bill proposes to extend that security for the remainder of their lives. there's an unintended anomaly, mr. speaker, that were current law not changed, barbara bush would have more safety than if they were president themselves. the person and the symbol of our presidency is safe and secure for the occuration of their natural lives. with that i would yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: mr. speaker, before i yield to the distinguished gentlelady fr
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)